- Davey: Labour maths do not add up
- Labour’s police pledge an “empty promise” without extra funding
- Lib Dems: Widdecombe fuels election pact scandal
Davey: Labour maths do not add up
Responding to the Labour Party Manifesto launched today, Liberal Democrat Shadow Chancellor Ed Davey said:
As long as Jeremy Corbyn continues pursuing his Brexit policy, the maths in his manifesto simply do not add up.
The Liberal Democrats will stop Brexit and use the £50 billion Remain Bonus to invest in public services and build a brighter future. We’ll prioritise tackling the climate emergency and investing in housing, education and welfare, while Corbyn would embark on yet another Brexit renegotiation.
Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour party has put forward a manifesto which is filled with uncosted, undeliverable promises and fails to address Brexit. Only the Liberal Democrats will stop Brexit and build a brighter future.
Labour’s police pledge an “empty promise” without extra funding
Liberal Democrat Shadow Home Secretary Christine Jardine has warned Labour can’t be trusted to tackle knife crime after the party’s manifesto promised to “recruit 2,000 more frontline officers than have been planned for by the Conservatives”, but allocated no extra funding for the police in their costings. She said:
Across the country, we are seeing rising crime and falling police numbers. Far too many people now feel unsafe walking down their own streets.
Jeremy Corbyn is ludicrous to think he can hire more police officers with zero pounds. He has no way to pay this, even before Brexit hits. It is an empty promise and Corbyn can’t be trusted.
Only the Liberal Democrats will invest in the things that actually work to build safer communities: more community policing, more youth services and a proper public health approach to serious violence.
Lib Dems: Widdecombe fuels election pact scandal
Following Ann Widdecombe’s comments on LBC this evening that she was offered a role in the Brexit negotiations to stand down in the general election, Liberal Democrat Shadow Brexit Secretary Tom Brake said:
This revelation by Ann Widdecombe is yet more evidence that the Conservative Party may have acted illegally in offering her a job in the Brexit negotiations in return for her standing aside in the 2019 election.
The allegation must be added to the police investigation into whether peerages were offered to Brexit party candidates to stand down.This is just further evidence that Boris Johnson’s Conservatives are not fit for government.
Only the Liberal Democrats can take seats of the Conservatives in this election. Every vote for the Liberal Democrats is a vote to take on Boris Johnson, stop Brexit, and build a brighter future.
Follow @LibDemVoice on Twitter
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
The 'Silk Road' is a myth: Trade with the East went by sea and India was at its heart
Honouring the Real Thing and launching Black History Month in Liverpool
Starmer kills off Leveson two
Michael's weekly ward surgeries today! #dundeewestend
Bye bye coal: A Net Zero milestone
Helen Dudden
Roland
Suzanne Fletcher
Joseph Bourke
Steve Trevethan
2 Comments
As Paul Johnson of the IFS has said, the kind of reforms Labour proposes will require far more people to pay more tax than just the very rich and corporations. Claiming that these reforms, many of which would seem to have considerable support in the country as a whole, myself included.
As a person whose combined pensions put me well into the tax paying bracket, albeit at the current basic level, I would be perfectly willing to forgo, for example, a free TV licence and bus pass AND I would be prepared pay a few more pence in my pound in income tax.
This has been a miserable General Election so far. I just wish that ALL parties would come clean with us all and admit that you can’t get something for nothing. I just hope that, to quote the words of Lynton Crosby, someone will throw a cat on the table; not a dead one but one whose indignation at being ill treated will bring a bit of common sense into the debate.
The final sentence in para 1 should have read: ‘Claiming that these reforms……..myself included, can be achieved without rises in basic income tax is plainly dishonest”.